阑尾切除术应该在腹腔镜下进行吗?临床前瞻性随机试验。

B. Mantoglu, B. Karip, Metin Mestan, Y. Iscan, B. Ağca, H. Altun, K. Memişoğlu
{"title":"阑尾切除术应该在腹腔镜下进行吗?临床前瞻性随机试验。","authors":"B. Mantoglu, B. Karip, Metin Mestan, Y. Iscan, B. Ağca, H. Altun, K. Memişoğlu","doi":"10.5152/UCD.2015.2843","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\nLaparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been described in 1983, and its superiority over open appendectomy (OA) is still being debated. Currently, there is no agreement on the advantages of LA. Postoperative pain is reported to be lower along with a faster return to normal activities in LA. However, some studies do not support these findings. In our study, we aimed to compare the outcomes and cost effectiveness of LA and OA.\n\n\nMATERIAL AND METHODS\nPatients were prospectively randomized into LA (31 patients) and OA (32 patients) groups. Demographic data, pre- and postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, white blood cell (WBC) count, duration of surgery and hospitalization, complications, and pain scores (VAS) were recorded. Cost was calculated for both groups. Return to normal activities was evaluated by phone calls at the first and second week and 1 month after surgery.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThere was a significant postoperative decrease in WBC count in the LA group (p<0.01). There were no differences between LA and OA groups in terms of postoperative CRP levels (p>0.05). The rates of wound infection and abscess were similar (p>0.05), while post-operative pain and time to return to normal activities were higher in the OA group (p<0.01). There was a positive correlation between BMI and operative time in the LA group (p<0.01), while BMI and operative time did not show a correlation in the OA group (p>0,05). The average cost in the LA and OA groups were 1960.5±339.05 and 687.115±159.5 TL, respectively.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nLA is an effective method in the treatment of acute appendicitis due to less pain and faster recovery. LA can be the choice of treatment in acute appendicitis, with utilization of re-useable and cheaper vascular sealing devices.","PeriodicalId":90992,"journal":{"name":"Ulusal cerrahi dergisi","volume":"339 1","pages":"224-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Should appendectomy be performed laparoscopically? Clinical prospective randomized trial.\",\"authors\":\"B. Mantoglu, B. Karip, Metin Mestan, Y. Iscan, B. Ağca, H. Altun, K. Memişoğlu\",\"doi\":\"10.5152/UCD.2015.2843\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"OBJECTIVE\\nLaparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been described in 1983, and its superiority over open appendectomy (OA) is still being debated. Currently, there is no agreement on the advantages of LA. Postoperative pain is reported to be lower along with a faster return to normal activities in LA. However, some studies do not support these findings. In our study, we aimed to compare the outcomes and cost effectiveness of LA and OA.\\n\\n\\nMATERIAL AND METHODS\\nPatients were prospectively randomized into LA (31 patients) and OA (32 patients) groups. Demographic data, pre- and postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, white blood cell (WBC) count, duration of surgery and hospitalization, complications, and pain scores (VAS) were recorded. Cost was calculated for both groups. Return to normal activities was evaluated by phone calls at the first and second week and 1 month after surgery.\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nThere was a significant postoperative decrease in WBC count in the LA group (p<0.01). There were no differences between LA and OA groups in terms of postoperative CRP levels (p>0.05). The rates of wound infection and abscess were similar (p>0.05), while post-operative pain and time to return to normal activities were higher in the OA group (p<0.01). There was a positive correlation between BMI and operative time in the LA group (p<0.01), while BMI and operative time did not show a correlation in the OA group (p>0,05). The average cost in the LA and OA groups were 1960.5±339.05 and 687.115±159.5 TL, respectively.\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSION\\nLA is an effective method in the treatment of acute appendicitis due to less pain and faster recovery. LA can be the choice of treatment in acute appendicitis, with utilization of re-useable and cheaper vascular sealing devices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90992,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ulusal cerrahi dergisi\",\"volume\":\"339 1\",\"pages\":\"224-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ulusal cerrahi dergisi\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5152/UCD.2015.2843\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ulusal cerrahi dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/UCD.2015.2843","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

摘要

目的腹腔镜阑尾切除术(LA)于1983年被报道,其优于开放式阑尾切除术(OA)仍有争议。目前,对于洛杉矶的优势还没有达成一致意见。据报道,术后疼痛较低,并能更快地恢复洛杉矶的正常活动。然而,一些研究并不支持这些发现。在我们的研究中,我们的目的是比较LA和OA的结果和成本效益。材料与方法将患者前瞻性随机分为LA组(31例)和OA组(32例)。记录人口统计学数据、术前和术后c反应蛋白(CRP)水平、白细胞(WBC)计数、手术和住院时间、并发症和疼痛评分(VAS)。计算两组的成本。术后第1周、第2周和1个月通过电话评估患者恢复正常活动的情况。结果LA组术后白细胞计数明显降低(p0.05)。OA组伤口感染和脓肿发生率相似(p>0.05),术后疼痛和恢复正常活动时间明显高于OA组(p>0.05)。LA组和OA组的平均成本分别为1960.5±339.05和687.115±159.5 TL。结论la治疗急性阑尾炎疼痛小,恢复快,是一种有效的治疗方法。利用可重复使用且价格低廉的血管封闭装置,LA可作为急性阑尾炎的治疗选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Should appendectomy be performed laparoscopically? Clinical prospective randomized trial.
OBJECTIVE Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) has been described in 1983, and its superiority over open appendectomy (OA) is still being debated. Currently, there is no agreement on the advantages of LA. Postoperative pain is reported to be lower along with a faster return to normal activities in LA. However, some studies do not support these findings. In our study, we aimed to compare the outcomes and cost effectiveness of LA and OA. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients were prospectively randomized into LA (31 patients) and OA (32 patients) groups. Demographic data, pre- and postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, white blood cell (WBC) count, duration of surgery and hospitalization, complications, and pain scores (VAS) were recorded. Cost was calculated for both groups. Return to normal activities was evaluated by phone calls at the first and second week and 1 month after surgery. RESULTS There was a significant postoperative decrease in WBC count in the LA group (p<0.01). There were no differences between LA and OA groups in terms of postoperative CRP levels (p>0.05). The rates of wound infection and abscess were similar (p>0.05), while post-operative pain and time to return to normal activities were higher in the OA group (p<0.01). There was a positive correlation between BMI and operative time in the LA group (p<0.01), while BMI and operative time did not show a correlation in the OA group (p>0,05). The average cost in the LA and OA groups were 1960.5±339.05 and 687.115±159.5 TL, respectively. CONCLUSION LA is an effective method in the treatment of acute appendicitis due to less pain and faster recovery. LA can be the choice of treatment in acute appendicitis, with utilization of re-useable and cheaper vascular sealing devices.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信